-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: 7 to 25% CS (was: Denmark the Csection rate...) From: Edwin Bello (edbello@mindspring.com) Sun Aug 10 10:35:11 1997 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Diana Saari MD: "Re: Female circumcision & childbirth" Previous message: R.Daniel Braun, MD FACOG: "Re: was Humor Now changing Doctors" Maybe in reply to: Bernard Cristalli: "7 to 25% CS (was: Denmark the Csection rate...)" Next in thread: Bernard Cristalli: "Re: 7 to 25% CS (was: Denmark the Csection rate...)" Bernard, In the entire answer I imply that although I agree with the fact that a 23-24% c/s rate is too high and also know that there is a c/s rate that is entirely too low. Do you agree that a 0% c/s is too low? Do you believe that by doing a c/s with a total placenta previa gives that infant and mother a better chance. Do you believe a c/s in a patient at 8 cm for over 2 hours and with an estimated fetal with of aprox. 8 lbs. increase the infant's chance for a intact survival? Do you believe that a doing a c/s when the patient has repetitive late decelerations in a primigravida in active labor(4cm) will increase the infant's chance? If you do not believe that you can improve the neonatal death rate or neonatal morbidity then Please DO NOT EVER DO A C/S AGAIN. I believe there is a middle ground where there is a too high a c/s that does not improve neonatal outcome but my common sense tell me that there is also a too low c/s rate(probably less than 5%). Please the next time someone talks you about the Dublin study tell that that it was the increase in c/s they were stating not that c/s do not improve neonatal outcome. -- Edwin Bello M.D.,F.A.C.O.G. Private Practice Forest Park, Georgia Edbello@mindspring.com -----Original Message----- From: Bernard Cristalli [SMTP:bcrist@club-internet.fr] Sent: Sunday, August 10, 1997 10:27 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: 7 to 25% CS (was: Denmark the Csection rate...) Edwin Bello wrote: >to say that c/s does not improve fetal outcome does not go with common >sense > > > Are you implying that obstetrical care did not improve during that time? > Or that all of the improvement came solely on pediatric care. > > > > > 1. The increase of the C-section rate doesn't improve the infant > > outcome. > > 2. The improvement comes from the pediatric care. > > > -- > That were the authors' conclusions. And that suits me too. -- Edwin, remember that the CS rate was circa 5%, at least, in that study . It's obvious that CS did improve fetal outcome. But above a certain rate the improvement can come nowhere else than from pediatrics. In paris there's a surveillance of the CS rates in the different depts of Ob. It goes from 7 to 25%. And the fetal outcome is the same. The difference? 7% Depts are chaired by rather obstetrician obgyns and 25% Depts are chaired by rather surgeon obgyns. > -- > Bernard Cristalli MD CNGOF > AIHP - ACCA > Paris - France > http://www.obgyn.net/corresp/cristalli.htm -- Bernard Cristalli MD CNGOF AIHP - ACCA Paris - France http://www.obgyn.net/corresp/cristalli.htm Next message: Diana Saari MD: "Re: Female circumcision & childbirth" Previous message: R.Daniel Braun, MD FACOG: "Re: was Humor Now changing Doctors" Maybe in reply to: Bernard Cristalli: "7 to 25% CS (was: Denmark the Csection rate...)" Next in thread: Bernard Cristalli: "Re: 7 to 25% CS (was: Denmark the Csection rate...)"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:23:13 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.